Skip to main content

About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17
and jim demint has been talking about with internal circumstances, credibility of the research, the numbers are adjusted or fixed, the minute you do that you know your intellectual adversaries, we know your friends have gone over the line again. we knew that was the very first place that had to be covered and had to start sticking our issues carefully and some of those, i will never forget there will be an expansion of medicare proposed by senator ted kennedy that should be reason enough to have opposed it. we looked up the numbers and said this is in the $2 billion increase they say it is going to be. it will be closer to $10 billion. fear the good friends in the congressional budget office, send it over to the congressional budget office, they did, the congressional budget office came back and said the number was a little more. they justified our number, this president finished the number and said to people maybe we can rely on it and mandate leadership came along and fooled that story and told it so well in the first paragraph. >> what release strikes me in writing about exp
"empire of shadows: the entick store of yellow stone." brian fagan writes about the oceans, and jim sterba writes about nature wars. this is book tv on c-span2. live coverage from l.a. >> historian from montana, and it was a little bit wintry when i left but it's nice to be here for this beautiful southern california day, as usual. joined here today by three writers who come to us originally from as far away as and no from as far aim detroit. away as new york on one side and santa barbara on the other side of the continent they bring us story that overlap in some interesting ways that will be fun to explore here. particularly on the idea of exploration and expanding boundaries, including the boundaries of the sea, the rockie mountains and even you're own backyard. and as we'll see there's consequences for this very human pursuit. some intended and maybe some not so much. and what i found interesting going through the biographies of these three individuals is they all three reported from all parts of the globe, working at field archaeologists, war correspondents and voices for the en
leadership on a urm inform issues and ultimately joined the leadership. we saw jim demint from south carolina become an important king maker in the senate. having a lot influence. in 2008 we saw the ultimate congressional back bench in the person of paul ryan show you can have a lasting impact on the debate. i think that is where the action is going to be going forward. the final thing i would say in terms of opportunities for limiting the federal government is if you look at when conservatives and libertarians have been conservative in the -- successful in the past. it's been in response to liberal government. to people always like big government when it's free. soon we're going see the middle class begin to pay some of the costs, and that is really the circumstances under which the social revolution of the 1960 and '70s gave way to the limited skeet reform of the '70s and 1990s to a point when you are democratic presidents talking about the era of being over and deficit reduction the best thing for the economy. and actually talking about entitlement reform. unfortunately nothing happened. t
. >> thank you, jim, and thank you for your leadership on the task force. and i want to express my thanks to the constitution project but also to all of my fellow task force members, what they brought to the table in terms of experience, wisdom, public service really made a difference in the development of this project and important report. as jim mentioned, there's more than 24 findings and recommendations. we can't cover all of those this morning, but we do want to hit some of the highlights. we hope you'll take the entire report, study it through, and look at each of those recommendations. why is this report important? it's important because we as a nation have to get this right. i look back in history to the time during world war ii that we interned some japanese-america japanese-americans. at the time it seemed like the right and proper thing to do. but in light of history it was an error. and so today, this report will hopefully put into focus some of the actions taken in the post-9/11 environment. there's some key questions one of -- some key questions we wanted to address this poi
now. u.s. remember at the beginning of the iraq war, jim asked me a question, does this still hold true today? do movie stars need be afraid to speak out? and i would say, yes. the lesson is, if what you care about is your pocketbook, if you want to speak out and be pro patriotic and defend america right or wrong, you'll never get in trouble. if you want to be critical of foreign policy because you belief, as a citizen -- remember, we have a thing called the constitution. all men are created equal. everybody, at least from the beginning, white, male, 2 1, with property, could vote. since then we've expanded -- well, i'm not being sarcastic because in terms of the world to have any white male who was sovereign, that we were sovereign. the american revolution declared the people sovereign rather than a king or queen. you couldn't have a king or queen taking your land away because they had finch it to you through sovereign rights. so if every citizen has a right to say what they should or should not do in our government, we would think we could respect that, and yet at the very begi
completely agree. one of the close i found i especially really like was from a former congressman jim kline and he said it's a little hard to believe that your nonfiction book you can't put down. and i thought that it was especially appropriate because if you like this book, it's different from a lot of nonfiction work that i've read. and that it really does read like a thriller. it really does, it takes these little discussions, and jack should manatee, humanity side to it. >> guest: we like to think it's an important book in the sense that it tells you how the court works. there are so few good books out there that explains what's the process, how do they go about this, how do they decide these cases, what are they saying to one another? we see these cases that split the court five before. what do they think? to the personal this get into it? so it's about not just about capital punishment. it's a book about how the court operates. >> guest: when he did get into those in the library of congress, the memorandum, the notes back and forth between the justices that are available him and a lot
joking that jim demint should run for president. this isn't exactly what i had in mind. [laughter] perhaps he misunderstood me. you know, the ting that makes jim -- the thing that makes jim demint a great leader is the same thing that has always made people like matt spaulding and the heritage foundation itself so valuable; that is, your shared insistence on making the positive case on conservativism, what conservatives are for. in washington it's common for both parties to succumb to easy negativity. republicans and democrats stand opposed to each other, obviously, in outspoken partisanship is what almost always gets the most headlines. this negativity is unappealing on both sides, and that helps explain why the federal government is increasingly held in such low regard by the american people. but for the left the defensive crouch at least makes sense. liberalism's main purpose today is to defend its past gains from conservative reform. but negativity on the right, to my mind, makes no sense at all. the left has created this false narrative that liberals are for things, and conse
a difference in the development of this project and important report. as jim mentioned, there's more than 24 findings and recommendations. we can't cover all of those this morning that we want to hit some of the highlights. we hope he will take the entire report, study it through and look at each of those recommendations. why is this report important? it's important because we as a nation have to get this right. i looked back in history to the time during world war ii that we in turn to some japanese-americans. at the time it seemed like the right and proper thing to do but in light of history, it was an error. as of today this report will hopefully put into focus some of the actions taken in the post 9/11 environment. there are some key questions we wanted to address this morning. one, did the treatment of suspected terrorists and u.s. custody rise to the left of torture? second how did this happen and what can we learn from this to make better decisions to the future. we found the u.s. personnel in many instances used interrogation techniques on detainee's that constitute torture. american
agricultural. thank you all very very much for being here. megan smith, jim kolbe and judson please come forward. we are going to go straight through the noon hour because of the numbers we have. some senators have been thinking of going in for lunch and other meetings that are taking place but we will begin with megan smith who is commissioner of the vermont commission of tourism appointed by -- in 2011. before that she was in the vermont legislature and before she became commissioner she and her husband owned and operated the vermont in which is a very nice place. for over a dozen years. ms. smith, go ahead. >> chairman lacie ranking member grassley members of the committee i'm pleased to be here today on behalf of the vermont department of tourism and marketing and the broader traveling community to highlight the importance of travel related provisions included in immigration reform. vermont is very dependent on tourism. our percentage of jobs in the industry is twice the natural -- national average of 38%. the majority of our businesses are small and family-owned and agri-tourism is
in the united states senate joking or perhaps half joking that jim demint should run for president. this isn't exactly what i had in mind. [laughter] perhaps he misunderstood me. you know, the ting that makes jim demint a great leader is the same thing that has always made people like matt spalding and the heritage foundation itself so very valuable; that is, your shared insistence on making the positive case for conservativism, what conservatives are for. in washington it's common for both parties to succumb to easy negativity. republicans and democrats stand opposed to each other, obviously, and outspoken partisanship almost always gets the most headlines. this negativity is unappealing on pote sides, and that helps explain why the federal government is increasingly held in such low regard by the american people. but for the left the defensive crouch at least makes sense. liberalism's main purpose today is to defend itself past gains -- its past gains from conservative reform. but megativity on the right, to my mind, makes no sense at all. the left has created this false narrative that lib
that an agreement and all the responsibility for the gaza strip and hamas? >> good question. >> jim, the microphone is coming. >> good to see you again. as you knoi m believer in when yowritwhen you said d so forgive me for what i'm about to say that i'm very frustrated middle east peace activist for those of you that money i've been involved in this for over 23 years trying to organize the churches in this area and have spoken in other parts of the country as well. so, with that in mind please forgive me because this is a harsh question you as well as everyone in this room i think you are all living in a fantasy and i am, too and here is the problem. in your presentation, you talked about the arab street and how connected they are and you're absolutely right. but you didn't with the public opinion in this country. you have got to. we are democracy and we are not disconnected from the public opinion. when you look as i have done at public opinion onisrael and palestine for the last 20 years, guess what, over 50% of americans support israel. less than 10% with a few exceptions, the war was one of th
county police chief jim johnson, assault weapons are -- quote -- "meant for the battlefield." milwaukee chief of police, ed flynn, "military characteristics are not simply cosmetic in nature. these weapons are designed for combat." end quote. and john walsh, the united states attorney for colorado couldn't be more clear. "these weapons, he said, "are crafted to be as effective as possible at killing human beings." end quote. now, where are we today? seven states and the district of columbia banned assault weapons prior to the newtown, massacre. these are my own state, california, connecticut, d.c., hawaii, maryland, massachusetts, new york, and new jersey. since newtown, legislators in 20 states have introduced bills to either ban assault weapons or strengthen existing bans. 20 states are now contemplating action. connecticut and new york passed laws to tighten their existing bans, to prohibit assault weapons with one military characteristic, which is what we do in this bill. maryland expanded an existing ban on assault pistols to cover rifles and assault shotguns. in massachusetts and
activated and incident management assistant jim, three preliminary damage assessment teams, and we are also standing by to assist in any other way. our eoc remains at level three, which is at increased readiness. we will continue to monitor the events over the course of the day and provide you with updates as they are relevant. i might add, mr. chairman, that many of the things i've just gone through are examples of the kinds of activities that have been supported by the committee, through fema, through the various grants that we supply, search and rescue being a good example of the kinds of things that grants have been supporting increasing our capacity for response and resilience as a nation. so that is the most recent on west, texas. with respect to boston, we are, we are investi this as an act of terror. we ae assisting. ice is part of the jttf. we have over four dozen ice agents now assigned to the boston office helping in the investigation. cdp is assisting in a number of tays immediately after the we work to close logan, the ground air for a few hours and to institute special targeti
that this is the law of the land and going forward i think you will see that. >> host: one question from jim. he writes i'm 62 in good health, why not just go without until something comes of? >> guest: one reason is you will have to pay a fine. it's low in the first year, only $95. it goes up in a few years to 2% of hearing, or $700 or if you sign up for coverage although people worry the penalties are too low. but like anyone, as my mother used to tell me don't go a day without health insurance. you never know when you are going to have a concussion and you never know when you're going to be in a car accident. is it really a risk you want to take? >> host: going to ted from huntington new york on our republican line. good morning, you're on with jenny gold. >> caller: good morning. i would like to know about the policy you're in new york. i want to move out of new york. can this policy follow me you know to another state? or if -- >> host: do you have to change policies with each state you are in? is that what you're asking? >> caller: yes. >> guest: the thing about this lot is it's a state-by-state
, that is the --. >> host: charles there is tweet relating to what you're saying. jim writes can an american citizen be considered an enemy combatant? >> guest: absolutely goes back to the civil war. goes certainly to world war ii. anwar al-awlaki was american-born. president obama use ad drone to kill him in the wilds of yemen. if you, if you fill eight yourself with enemy forces and you go to war against american citizens and you kill americans will fully and you do so on behalf of a movement or enemy forces then indeed you can be considered an enemy combatant. being a enemy combatant simply because you're an american citizen. if in world war ii you went over and joined nazi forces were you not a enemy combatant? of course you were. . . >> he didn't treat those terrible tragedies as access war, but appropriately treated them as heinous criminal acts to be investigated, prosecuted, and appropriately punishes. >> host: al-alwaki was an american citizen, kimed on orders of president obama. did president obama violate the constitution by doing that? >> guest: well, actually, we have a lawsuit in which
the period of jim crow. that is our live coverage for today and we hope your life again tomorrow. right now we are going to go to the hancock foundation building and this is where the history panel here at "the los angeles times" festival of books is just beginning. you are watching booktv on c-span2. [inaudible conversations] >> will you let me know when we are supposed to start? [laughter] >> good morning. that is my signal. my name is tim newton on back of "the los angeles times" and i'm pleased to welcome you to the 2013 festival of books. books. more specifically i'm delighted to welcome this morning to today's panel which brings some really remarkable authors to talk about their latest work and the idea behind him. before we get going i have been handed a piece of paper that says it's critically important that i read this. please silence all cell phones and i also need to tell you there is a book signing following the session here the book signing for this panel is in the staging area number one. i am told this is on the festival map and the center of the event program so the office h
on this particular issue to comment on this and on her question of the political will. >> thank you very much, jim. if i knew the answer on political will, i suppose there would be more prophetic qualities to my history. one hopes that we will see it, one hopes that we will see immigration and gun control and other efforts. i spent my life as a diplomat and spent a good part of that life trying to importune other governments to live up to the rule of law. i was cha gripped, embarrassed -- chagrined, embarrassed and, indeed, in many ways felt undermined by the notion that our country which instructed me on numerous occasions to uphold the rule of law particularly indefinite detention without trial was something that we now practice and continue to practice despite all of the questions that people tend to want to raise about a war and prisoners of war and all of the rest. my sense is that we need a specific way forward. the report contains recommendations on a specific way forward; simply trial or military commission with rights and privileges equal to our article iii court or system. if that won't
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17